Where plaintiff's brokers fraudulently secured title to certain real estate belonging to plaintiff and incumbered it, plaintiff was entitled to have the incumbrance cancelled and the title restored. Monyhan v. Wolff, 143 P. 824, 26 Colo. App. 289.

Where an agent, without the knowledge of his principal, acted for the other party to a contract for an exchange of land, and the principal brought an action to rescind the contract, and was denied rescission because she was unable to put defendant in statu quo, and the court found that she was entitled to receive from defendant a sum of money which defendant had agreed to pay on a mortgage on the land conveyed to him, but had wrongfully refused to pay the same, judgment for such sum would be rendered as alternative relief, not only against defendant, but against the agent, who was also a party to the action. Newman v. Friedman, 136 S. W. 251, 156 Mo. App. 142.

A purchase of land by an agent for its sale, who, without knowledge of his principal, buys property that he was to sell; held, voidable at the instance of the grantor. Payne v. Beard, 247 F. 247, 159 C. C. A. 341, cer. den., Beard v. Payne, 38 S. Ct. 335, 246 U. S. 666, 62 L. Ed. 929.

Where contract of sale provided that broker should have the right to demand the delivery of a deed, the broker can not insist that it was the duty of the owner to enforce specific performance. Alison v. Chapman, 173 P. 389, - Cal. App. - .

An agent of an owner to find a purchaser on the owner's terms, by a sale of land on such terms could not compel its conveyance. Schuhmacher v. Lebeck, 173 P. 1072, - Kan. Sup. - .

Attempt by agent authorized to find a purchaser for land on certain terms to purchase the land for himself, without disclosing himself as purchaser, was within the rule forbidding a selling agent to buy for himself, that he was to receive as compensation whatever the land brought over a fixed sum. Id.

A contract for the sale of realty negotiated by a broker who represents not only the seller but also the purchaser, without the seller's knowledge, is voidable at the seller's option. McCulley v. Rivers, 170 N. W. 24, 200 Mich. 417.

In a suit by a property owner for the cancellation of notes which he executed and delivered to defendants as compensation for the negotiation of a loan, which was intended to enable him to construct a permanent building on his property; held, that the notes should be cancelled, as without consideration, the loan not having been consummated because of conditions insisted upon by the lender procured by the brokers. Newman v. Adelsperger, 173 N, W. 351, - Mich. Sup. - .

If the broker was the agent of the buyers of land and collected full price from them and failed to pay it to the seller, as between the seller and buyers the transaction will be treated as if the buyers had not paid any part of the price, and decree of cancellation of the seller's deed to them will result. Wynn v. Hoffman, 82 S. 32, - Ala. Sup. - .

Equity has jurisdiction of a suit by a corporation against a real estate agent who was engaged to purchase a factory site for the corporation; and, notwithstanding the fiduciary relations, made a certain profit, the jurisdiction of equity not being denied by reason of a right of action at law and on quasi contract. H. J. Jaeger Co. v. Hannan, 108 A. 1, - N. J. Eq. - .

Where owner of land, upon selling it, gave to broker who had assisted in procuring the purchaser the owner's note, which was to be surrendered by the broker to the owner, if notes representing three instalments of the purchase price of the land were not paid, and later the land sale was cancelled and the land recon-veyed to the owner, but the owner's note to the broker was transferred by the latter to an innocent purchaser before maturity which recovered thereon, the owner was entitled to recover over against the broker. Gillean v. First State Bank of Barry, 219 S. W. 896, - Tex. Civ. App. - .

If a real estate agent having property of another to sell became personally interested in the sale, without knowledge of the owner, equity will not aid him (broker) in enforcing his interest so acquired in the property sold. Chester v. Campbell, 109 A. 901, - N. J. Ct. of Err. and App. - .

In view of the relations between parties the real estate broker with whom property is listed for sale can not purchase it for himself, or become interested in the purchase, unless his interest is disclosed to the principal, and even when disclosed his actions must be characterized by the utmost good faith thereafter, and broker who undertook to find a purchaser for property belonging to an aged woman can not, where he did not disclose to her his interest, have specifically enforced for his own benefit as purchaser a contract for sale which she signed, but which obligated no one to purchase. Besser v. Allen, I11 A. 885, - E. I. Sup. - .

In an action for specific performance of contract for sale of land, it must be shown that the agent's authority was identical with the terms of contract sued on, and if terms of contract vary from express authority, where express authority rests in parol, proof of parol authority must be clear and convincing, and also show authority to include all material terms embodied in contract. Spengler v. Sonnenberg, 88 0. S. 192. Sec. 573. Exceptions.

Where an agent in making a sale of real estate has acted as agent for the vendor as well as the vendee, he can not recover commissions from the vendee, unless he brings the case within one of the established exceptions to the general rule that an agent can not recover commissions from both parties to the transaction. Bunn v. Kerch, 214 I11. 259, 73 N. B. 419.